Observers Believe Marijuana Initiative Won't Pass
function share_this(num) {
 tit=encodeURIComponent('Observers Believe Marijuana Initiative Won't Pass');
 site = new Array(5);
 return false;

Observers Believe Marijuana Initiative Won't Pass
Posted by CN Staff on April 10, 2010 at 09:11:41 PT
By Wes Woods II, Staff Writer 
Source: Contra Costa Times
California --  Local political pundits say the chances that a ballot initiative to legalize the possession and sale of marijuana will be successful appear to be - at best - hazy. There is still seven months of campaigning ahead, but the experts say they find it difficult to believe it could succeed in November's mid-term elections. "I think most of the analysis on the medical marijuana initiative was it would not stand a chance, (but) this is going to be very hard to predict," said Doug Johnson, a research fellow with Claremont McKenna College's Rose Institute of State and Local Government.
Johnson said the state's approval of Proposition 215 legalizing medical marijuana in 1996 "definitely surprised me. Few people gave it much of a chance. It surprised a lot of people. And I think as a result of that past surprise, a lot more attention is being paid to this." Johnson said he expects "there will be lots of international and national attention as the initiative gets close (to November)." Jack Pitney, political science professor at Claremont McKenna College, said some polls show the marijuana initiative has some support. "But I wouldn't bet the rent that it's going to pass," Pitney said. "Law enforcement will come out against it very strongly. We'll see a lot of messages tying marijuana use to the use of harder drugs. And even though ... it limits it to people over 21, the opponents will point out it will be very easy for younger people to get their hands on it." In fact, Pitney thinks the anti-pot vote will be substantial. He cited the fact that in mid-term elections, the majority of voters are older and more conservative. "A lot of gray hairs are going to be entering the voting booth in November," he said. For Johnson, the vote on the marijuana measure will have an interesting aspect with current Attorney General Jerry Brown on the ballot running for governor. Brown, as governor, signed legislation lessening the penalty for marijuana possession and has said he opposes this year's measure. "It will be very interesting to have this on the ballot with Jerry Brown," Johnson said. "And actually that may add support to Brown as marijuana supporters come out. But he will be put in a bad spot. History may lead him to take one position but as the state attorney general I'm interested to see what he does." Pitney said he didn't think that baby boomers, who grew up with the 1960s music festival Woodstock and its celebration of drug culture, would vote for the initiative. "I'm one of them," Pitney said. "However, I think a lot of us have come to have very different attitudes having families. There's nothing like having children to turn you into an anti-drug crusader." Pitney said he did not know how much of an effect money would have in the ballot initiative. "It's hard to know in advance. Probably not as much as you'd get in other initiative campaigns. The person behind it, Richard Lee, I don't know how much money he has to spend," he said. Pitney said fundraising will be a problem given the stigma tied to such contributions. "But if it's a close vote, it might go down," he said, "because people with the greatest interest will be too stoned to vote." Source: Contra Costa Times (CA)Author: Wes Woods II, Staff Writer Published: April 9, 2010Copyright: 2010 Bay Area News GroupContact: letters cctimes.comURL: -- Cannabis Archives
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help 

Comment #39 posted by ekim on April 14, 2010 at 09:39:46 PT
if anyone has Larry Kings show fone #
please post it so i can call in on Fri and ask Willie to please hold HempAid so the American People will seethe truth about new jobs and the value of the cannabis plant.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #38 posted by FoM on April 14, 2010 at 07:06:35 PT
Thank you. I will check it out for sure. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #37 posted by BGreen on April 14, 2010 at 06:41:13 PT
Thanks, ekim
I hope it goes as well as Larry's interview a couple of weeks ago with Snoop Dog. Snoop said he only uses cannabis "once in a blue moon." He went on to say there was a blue moon everyday. LOL He also posed this not-so-rhetorical question along the lines of "what if I told you I've never performed without using cannabis?"Larry then made a stupid remark about maybe Snoop might be better if he didn't use cannabis. Yeah, right.Of course, Larry also started singing a Blood, Sweat and Tears song when Snoop mentioned he used to listen to Earth, Wind and Fire as a young pup. Snoop was kind enough not to correct Larry, since Larry was obviously confused due to his lack of cannabis intake.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #36 posted by ekim on April 14, 2010 at 06:11:11 PT
22 posted by BGreen
Larry King will have Willie Nelson on Fri Nite
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #35 posted by ekim on April 13, 2010 at 07:32:38 PT
Cannabis must be put back in our Nat'l quiver
please Jerry Brown send your best Ag rep to this event. EIHA Conference is now established as the largest meeting of experts on industrial hemp in Europe and indeed world-wide. Specialists from all over the world will meet in order to exchange information regarding the latest developments in hemp and in other natural fibers and moreover on the applications for fibers, hurds (shivs), seeds and oil.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #34 posted by herbdoc215 on April 12, 2010 at 15:55:58 PT
Hope and everybody here at C-news 
This very thread is proof of some fears me and several friends have that Mr. Lee and company are over their heads and don't have the juice to see this thing through without all of our help. They should have had a person here of all places weeks ago explaining the initiative to all of us here so we could have helped them sell/explain this to the general public because you can be sure that if we're having problems with it then the folks whom are not connected are going to believe a lot of bs about this and it's going to be up to all of us to field off a bunch of crap so these guys can do the best they can if they are going to beard the beast they best stomp it in the dirt as bad PR of a bad loss is last thing we need! In the end I think the very nature of the public having their eyes opened for the first time the last few years of the true horror-show that prohibition has become will ensure passage of this in the end as folks are by and large onto the prison industry and DEA and their bullshit is wearing pretty thin about now! peace, Steve Tuck
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #33 posted by Hope on April 12, 2010 at 12:07:43 PT
Thanks you, Herbdoc.
That's what I was wondering after Cannibisblog posted, after getting past getting slapped in the face, first thing, with wet genitalia.I thought this was about recreational and would have nothing to do with the medical laws already in place. Glad to hear it doesn't.So, there ya go, Cannibisblog. It won't, if it's passed, effect the medical cannabis laws already in place for patients and their needs.That's good to know for sure, Herbdoc. Thanks.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #32 posted by Hope on April 12, 2010 at 12:01:37 PT
Your comments, about anything, as far as I'm concerned, are always welcome and appreciated. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #31 posted by herbdoc215 on April 12, 2010 at 08:24:52 PT
As far as my non-lawyer understanding
and the advice of many paid for lawyers...this new law in Nov doesn't touch 215 or medical cannabis laws and a recent Cali Supreme court decision Ca. vs Kelly wiped away limits if it was for personal/legitimate medical use? The law was poorly written/conceived I think and is designed to hook up certain individuals (LEE) it still is a major step forward and figure I will vote for it, firmly holding my nose in Nov. As the new law leaves 215 & medical out of it and will get most of the bs scripts to go away as they won't need them nor the amounts us sicker folks do...PLUS the haters are all against it and it does bring some change and takes away the ability of cops to play God with folks lives or shake people down? The times are changing...peace, steve 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #30 posted by BGreen on April 12, 2010 at 05:59:23 PT
Wow, cannibisblog, nice choice of words
Right now we have 100% illegality for recreational cannabis in the United States. You can accuse me of wetting myself (or worse, depending on your meaning of "getting all wet on ourselves") but the idea of taking the jack boots off of our throats, even a little bit, is pretty danged exciting to me.I have no doubts whatsoever that legalizing small amounts for recreational use in CA is only going to take away their argument about MMJ that it's just a front for the recreational user. They'll no longer be able to attack the medical users with limits because cannabis will be everywhere.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #29 posted by FoM on April 12, 2010 at 05:54:59 PT
I appreciate your comments about the War. It was a bad time because of the Draft. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #28 posted by ezrydn on April 12, 2010 at 04:52:56 PT:
An Apology
My first comment wasn't meant to "hijack" this thread. My thanks to my brothers that watched my back and to those who support us today. It's much appreciated.On a final note, I'd say this. I was there at the beginning. I thought I had it rough. Today, I'm sort of "out of contact" and enjoy filling my smartphone with books (Mobi and eReader), mostly about Nam. In my readings, I notice that each succeeding year, after I left, it only got worse and worse as far as contact went. So, to those who came AFTER me, my Stetson is off and I present a hearty "Garry Owen, Sir!" After all, all I ever did was ride helicopters and hump the bush. Plus, a deep helping of Pure Luck!Now, take what you know and apply it to reform! It works!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #27 posted by FoM on April 12, 2010 at 04:49:04 PT
My husband reads CNews and will appreciate your comment. When we found this one incident online because my husband was in that convey it was really amazing. I remember him telling me about this ambush when we first met after he got home from Vietnam. His truck was shot up but he was ok. He was only 18 years old when this happened. He enlisted, since he knew he would be drafted, at 17 with his mother having to sign permission.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #26 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on April 12, 2010 at 00:18:51 PT
cannibisblog 21 - Isn't this a recreational law?
Is there something in the law stating that the proposed recreational rules would supercede the more generous medicinal rules already in place?If not, it would only be recreational users who would be "severely" limited, although I think there are a lot of folks who would argue that you can grow plenty for yourself and probably at least a few friends in a 5x5 area.Certainly, you could grow an infinite amount more than in a 0x0 area, which is what recreational users are legally limited to at present.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #25 posted by Canis420 on April 11, 2010 at 22:38:34 PT:
Vietnam recollection:
I was born into this world in 1959 which made me a little to young to be called up. I remember watchin it on the news and playin army in a field full of dirt piles. We would pretend we were there. I would watch the draft lottery to see if my birthday came up, it always did. My neighbor, two doors down, got called up. Gary was injured by an explosive device while in country. When he was eventually released from the VA hospital and came home the whole neighborhood was out in the streets with a banner across Gilchrist, our street, to welcome our soldier home. Gary, last I heard (2007), was Assistant Director of the DAV. At the time I had no idea how other returning soldiers were treated in society. I just remember how we honored Gary's sacrafice. Every time I talk to a vet from that era I thank I am now thanking every Nam vet that has access to this forum.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #24 posted by John Tyler on April 11, 2010 at 17:19:15 PT
legal cannabis
The law is very detailed. However, I suspect the general public will not be so concerned about details. When cannabis legalization is passed, for most people, rightly or wrongly, it will mean that cannabis is legal, not a little bit is legal, or a tiny plot is legal. Cannabis will have been legalized. The cat will be out of the bag, and the bell will have been rung and things will have changed. It will be shouted around the world. Any kind of enforcement after that will be futile.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #23 posted by EAH on April 11, 2010 at 14:15:06 PT:
In many ways you're right. It's weak. There were better propositions but they had no money to collect signatures. Lee plans to benefit as a licensed producer distributor. It's written in such a way that production and distribution are going to be tightly controlled. Much more so than alcohol. What is likely to happen is that if it passes, Lee I'm sure will be first in line for licensing. He already operates in a friendly city. He will get favorable local ordinances to operate.
Savvy operators will be ready. This is written in a way that will make licensing 
rules that will vary greatly from locale to locale. The way this is written it will hamper open competition. It favors Lee as an existing provider.What should happen but won't is that Tom Ammiano's legislation be passed.
It's much more like existing beer and wine laws. If it were passed, what we would get would be far better. The legislature is too chicken to do it.
What is good and bad about the legislature is that what ever they do can be 
changed. Good because it can be improved, bad because it could be repealed. The proposition can only be altered to "further its purpose".
It;s hard to say what that means with this. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #22 posted by BGreen on April 11, 2010 at 12:05:51 PT
Is this what you were fighting for?
NC prosecutor: Nelson band member charges pendingENANSVILLE, N.C. – A North Carolina prosecutor says he still plans to prosecute six members of guitarist and singer Willie Nelson's band on drug and alcohol charges.********************************************OMG, this is so stupid!The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #21 posted by cannibisblog on April 11, 2010 at 12:00:11 PT
Do NOT Vote for this Law
Some of you pro MMJ people had better actually read this 'POS' purposed law before getting all wet on yourselves in happiness.The courts have REMOVED limits. 
This law severely limits what a person can have.Many patients need quite a bit because the COOK and eat it. A 5 x 5 area? What the heck? This puts collectives in massive jeopardy, and makes patients abilities to grow what they need impossible. You can't grow anything in a 5x5 area. That is an INSANE limit. This is like one or two plants!!WHY would Lee purpose these limits? Somehow, and I haven't figured out how yet, it benefits him and ultimately pharma companies frothing at the bit to jump in the game and put growers out of business. If I read this bill wrong, forgive me. But there seems to be a lot of people who have failed to see the ramifications of this bill.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #20 posted by FoM on April 11, 2010 at 07:57:53 PT
Thanks Guys: A Little About Stick and Vietnam
In late April 1969, a convoy from the 36th Battalion was bound for the 2/1 Cavalry base camp at Phan Rang south along the coastal highway (QL1). This was a short run that only took half a day to reach the destination and then return by the end of the day. The convoys ran with 70 to 80 trucks with three to five gun trucks. They usually had an MP gun jeep or V-100 armored car in the lead and gun trucks spaced evenly throughout the convoy with one in the trail party. The line up consisted of the MP gun jeep, the convoy commander’s gun jeep, Rick “Snuffy” Smith’s gun jeep, then the cargo trucks.  Route 1 or QL 1 ran north and south along the flat coastal plane. The “Coconut Grove,” was about halfway between Cam Ranh Bay and Phan Rang to the south. The “Coconut Grove” was a rubber plantation on the west side of the road and open field on the east with elephant grass. Smith claimed that a million monkeys must have lived in the grove and swarmed the trucks whenever they passed. That is why they called it the “Coconut Grove.” The coastal highway was a heavily trafficked highway by both military and civilian traffic. For this reason, no one ever expected to get hit along this route. The drivers did not even wear their flak vests.  When the convoy reached the “Coconut Grove,” the enemy initiated the ambush with small arms fire on the lead and middle vehicles creating two kill zones. The APC gun truck, “USA,” and one gun jeep were caught off guard. There was one gun truck and one gun jeep for every 30 vehicles. The vehicles were typically bunched up with no more than 20 feet between vehicles. The lead kill zone caught 16-20 vehicles. Gun trucks did their normal routine. Rick Smith fired his M79 grenade launcher from the hip as fast as could. The enemy fired a few mortars but missed. They overshot. The fire fight lasted about 15 minutes.No one in the convoy was killed or wounded but a number of vehicles were shot up. Most of them had flat tires. All were able to drive to their destination. The thing that Rick Smith learned was to never take his eyes off Coconut Grove again.URL:
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #19 posted by ezrydn on April 11, 2010 at 06:48:10 PT:
I thought I had left the warfare and maneuvering a long time ago. However, I have since found that what Unkle Sugar taught me about the bush can also be applied to reform.One of our biggest assets was the ability to maneuver, to flank and to attack. These same principles can be applied to today's work we face. We already have ID'd the enemy "bunkers." They're the lies we hear all the time. Simply maneuver, flank'em and attack. Attacks can be done civilly, also via debate and being ready to expose their lies, expose their "bunkers."While I don't believe anyone has the right to shout someone down and not allow them to speak, one must be ready, info locked and loaded, chamber that fact and SQUEEZE. And that firefight has to take place in public. Otherwise, it does no good.Pick an opponent in your immediate area and "hound" them. Become their shadow. As Charles used to say, "They can't use artillery on you if you grab their belts." Get in close!Every-day people have to see the Prohibitionists for what they are. And you're the only ones that can bring that to light.If you've had a military background, think about it. You can still use what you were taught.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #18 posted by BGreen on April 11, 2010 at 05:54:03 PT
ezrydn and Stick
Welcome home to you both and thank you.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #17 posted by ezrydn on April 11, 2010 at 03:58:47 PT:
For FoM
I was in Nam from 65-66. An 11Bravo RTO (your hubby will understand that one) and was with the 1/7th Cav, 1st Air Cav Div, in the Central Highlands. I got home Dec of 66 and got out Mar of 69. After my discharge, I lived in Hollywood and became an avid reader of the LA Free Press. That's where I heard about Woodstock. And I keep wondering, are all those people I knew really NOT going to vote on this? If anything, the passage of time has reinforced my dedication to see this through to fruition. I'm sure they feel the same way.Tell my brother I said, "Welcome Home!"
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #16 posted by EAH on April 10, 2010 at 23:27:53 PT:
Uphill battle
Being right guarantees nothing. There is the problem of turnout. Many yes voters are not reliable voters. Then there is the deep persistence of the myths that dominate most peoples thinking, even now. People think legal cannabis will mean a free for all. They don't understand that being illegal isn't really effective control. LEOs are going to
push their lies very very hard. Their job is easier. All they need to do is create enough fear, doubt and uncertainty to shave off 5-7% of possible support at the most to prevent
a 50+% yes vote. The yes side has to solidly convince a very soft 10-20% to really 
truly make the leap that is a yes vote. The problem is most people don't 
understand how screwed up prohibition is. They think it means keeping it away from kids. The other thing is that well over 50% aren't users themselves and have no personal stake.
If anything they are fearful of what legalization might really be like. For them it's just easier to say no. LEO ads will provide them with plenty of easy simple rationalizations.It will take an enormous amount of really good TV ads to have chance. Like,
tens of millions of dollars. We can count on a supersolid 30-35%. It's the next 20% that is going to be must harder to get than it should be. I doubt the necessary money is going to be there for this. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #15 posted by afterburner on April 10, 2010 at 22:58:42 PT
A Major Error in Judgment Called Prohibition
Here is part of a Canadian beer ad [not to promote that product but to illustrate how attitudes can change]:"... a fine Canadian pilsner, the legacy of a family brewing heritage, spanning three centuries, one kidnapping and a major error in judgment called Prohibition."The double-standard of the federal government, of the brainwashed pressure groups and of the international bullied victim countries has demonized cannabis for far too long, denying its medical properties and turning patients into criminals. This Prohibition II (of cannabis), which has lasted far longer than that original Prohibition, is an even more egregious, vicious and colossal error in judgment. It is high time to end the hypocrisy! 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #14 posted by Paint with light on April 10, 2010 at 21:08:38 PT
I recently did a full color restoration of the Grow Hemp for the War image that is halfway down the page on the Hemptopia site.I purchased a low quality reproduction years ago at an event we put on with the Cannabis Action Network.Legal like alcohol.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #13 posted by Hope on April 10, 2010 at 19:45:58 PT
I've said it before.
I think Herbdoc is probably to cannabis what George Washington Carver was to the peanut.Or something like that. He is a scientist... and I suspect, a genius scientist.That is so good. Talk about tailored to the needs of the person.How lovely a plant is that?
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #12 posted by Hope on April 10, 2010 at 19:42:26 PT
Comment 5
I suspect Herbdoc had something, if not everything, to do with developing that valuable strain of cannabis.Bravo!I know Storm Crow is interested in that. In fact... I think I remember some sort of hint as to some sort of surprise... or something a week or so ago.:0)That is so great.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #11 posted by Christen-Mitchell on April 10, 2010 at 18:46:57 PT:
California Legit
It should pass easily
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #10 posted by FoM on April 10, 2010 at 18:03:12 PT
You made it to Woodstock? Oh wow! We are watching on Direct TV on Hint: Woodstock Now and Then. We have seen this a couple of times and it still is worth seeing again. My husband was in Vietnam when Woodstock happened in August of 69. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #9 posted by The GCW on April 10, 2010 at 17:26:44 PT
What it comes down to:
The job for activists is to get the voters to the ballot box. Do that and it passes. The type which will vote against this issue is already going to vote, so it comes down to getting the ones who will support cannabis to take part. It's the one day to not be lazy, take it for granted etc...The example in Breckenridge, Colorado was an overwhelming population of cannabis supporters that made sure to show up at the booth; in fact I believe most voted early.GET 'EM OUT TO VOTE!Also, one of the key reasons so called baby boomers will support cannabis RE-legalization is because it will create a safe place for their children to puchase cannnabis. Right now their children may be purchasing cannabis from people who may also be selling hard drugs and carrying loaded guns ready to solve arguments.The list of reasons to RE-legalize cannabis / the superplant is growing faster than the plant itself.And the jack ass? We should not compromise the jack ass.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #8 posted by ezrydn on April 10, 2010 at 17:15:29 PT:
Rational Thought
Not one, can I detect in his writing. I'm 65, a doctorate education, a Woodstock attendee and enjoyed the whole thing. Now, this guy is saying that those who were with me, the other 4,999,999 have suddenly changed their minds? First off, they KNOW Prohibition is WRONG! They knew the answer long before the question was asked.They're probably not "afraid from their children" because they come from an age where parenting was still a taught subject in schools. Morals were discussed openly and we pledged out allegiance to the Flag. They have probably already raised their kids, knowing they've passed responsibility and sound judgment on to their kids. These "grey-hairs" are unlike the younger parents of today, who mostly haven't got a clue.These "baby-boomers" have been involved with, held many conversations and watched the clouds roll by as they enjoyed their drug of choice. This guy is of the opinion that these people are just going to waste voting day, stoned on the couch? I want some of what he's having!This is one vote I won't miss!!!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #7 posted by James Crosby on April 10, 2010 at 14:59:42 PT:
Don't listen to this crap... The polls are in our favor. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by Brandon Perera on April 10, 2010 at 14:34:44 PT
Where is hemp at
All people talk about is getting that stress free feeling from smoking but thats only ONE great thing it does. Its the most diverse plant in the world. its stupid that we have to be conversating about an issue for us such as this. This world is scary 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by Hope on April 10, 2010 at 13:25:58 PT
This seems important... at the NORML blog
New Strain Of Medicinal Marijuana Announced
April 9th, 2010 By: Allen St. Pierre, NORML Executive Director Share this Article 	       First Unveiling of New Strain To Redefine The Medical Cannabis IndustryNew Released Scientific Data Supports Medicinal Value, U.S. Government Ignores Scientific DataNext week’s Patients Out of Time (P.O.T.) conference in Rhode Island features numerous speakers and interesting topics, but the announcement by Harborside Health Center of the development a new Cannabidol-centric strain of cannabis I suspect will be of great interest to patients, medical providers and cultivators.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by HempWorld on April 10, 2010 at 12:54:54 PT
Jack Ass
Echo ...The initiative will pass, just leave it up to we, the people. But who knows what will happen after it passes ...
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by runruff on April 10, 2010 at 11:16:00 PT
This guy is a brainwashed jackass!
A lot of their rhetoric is geared toward telling Americans how we think.Of course we would not know how to look at this subject without the wisedom of ol', "I used to do it but now I want to stop everyone else from doing it because I have kids" Jack the Ass!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by FoM on April 10, 2010 at 09:51:44 PT
My Simple Comment
Excerpt: "I don't think that baby boomers, who grew up with the 1960s music festival Woodstock and its celebration of drug culture, would vote for the initiative. I'm one of them and I think a lot of us have come to have very different attitudes having families. There's nothing like having children to turn you into an anti-drug crusader."***I think that's far from true. 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by Vincent on April 10, 2010 at 09:33:33 PT:
Jack Pitney, a/k/a "the fortune teller"
Well, it would seem that Jack Pitney, a political science professor, is trying his hand at being an astrologist. The first thing he said that I didn't agree with is: "I don't think that baby boomers, who grew up with the 1960s music festival Woodstock and its celebration of drug culture, would vote for the initiative. I'm one of them and
I think a lot of us have come to have very different attitudes having families. There's nothing like having children to turn you into an anti-drug crusader." His words begin to betray him at this point. Then he shows his true colors with this stupid statement:"But if it's a close vote, it might go down, because people with the greatest interest will be too stoned to vote." And this is a political scientist? I am Fifty-five years of age and very, very few people my age that I talk to are against marijuana use. This guy is a brainwashed jackass!
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment